User talk:Kinneyboy90/Archive 1

; Archives
	21 May 2005 – 09 February 2006; 09 February 06 – 20 July 2006;

I am currently: Online

User Page

Userboxes

Talk

Email

Desk

Image source

Thank you for uploading Image:Grievousrosto.jpg. Its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. Please leave a note on the image page about the source of the image. Thank you. --Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:56, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Kinneyboy90, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Falphin 14:57, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Second Italo-Abyssinian War

Are you absolutely sure of the numbers as you swapped them. I remember reading book about the conflict listing 100,000 Ethiopeans in just /one/ battle. During the war every Ethiopean was mobilized (up to some degree). This all suggest the old order. Pavel Vozenilek 03:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have book "Abyssinia" from Ludwig Huyn and Joseph Kalmer (in Czech translation), written in 1935, after the hostilities had started. The table here lists Ethiopean 1.128.000 soldiers (the theoretical number), for example in Ogaden area 43.500 soldiers were staioned permanently. Some 55.000 soldiers were trained in modern ways by Belgian instructors. During war it was common for many soldiers to desert or came over to Italians (they'd lured over whole tribes).

The armament listed is: 900.000 rifles (200.000 modern), 3.600 automatic rifles and pistols, 400 guns (soma very old), 7 tank(ette)s, 7 armored cars.

Number for Italians are not listed, neither details of armament. L. Huyn was not military expert, only traveller. Pavel Vozenilek 23:06, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Actually, you may be correct. But at OnWar.com, it states Ethiopia had 100,000 men. I read a book about World War II. It said that Italy had about 80 divisions (about 800,000 men). I'm not sure, but check on the On War site.

Kinneyboy90 04:30, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: Image:Grievousrosto.jpg

Let me be brief in my reply:

The processing of images tagged with {{No source}} and {{unverified}} is completely backlogged. There are images in Category:Images with unknown source that have been in that category since last year!
The only reason I tagged Image:Grievousrosto.jpg as {{unverified}} was because the page does not cite its specific source. If you can cite its specific source on that page, we may not have to delete it.
I am more of a mergist.
In all my interactions, it seems to me that Inclusionism, Deletionism, Mergists, et al. are more concerned about the quality and the amount of content in each article, rather than whether or not each image description page lists each image's source, its copyright situation, and a image copyright tag.

Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:00, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:ACSW.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:ACSW.PNG. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag, so its copyright status is therefore unclear. Please add a tag to let us know its copyright status. (If you created/took the picture then you can use {{gfdl}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{fairuse}}.) See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have tagged them, too. Note that any unsourced and untagged imaged will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Nv8200p (talk) 16:28, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A reply

You left a note on my talk page, so I clicked on your name to see you user page. I see you like Dwight D. Eisenhower. I admire him too. By the way, I see you're conservative. Well, I hope this doesn't bug you but I'm a moderate Libertarian.--HistoricalPisces 17:11, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of political test and where did you take it? By the way, what's it like being a Pentecostal? I know thier worship is emotional and some practice vegetarianism and are fundamentalist.--HistoricalPisces 17:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Check your inclusionist link!

I stronly advise you to check your inclusionist link above your fact file (more facts about me).

Canadianism 03:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For love of goodness, check your inclusionist link!!! It is above your more facts about me. It leads to RELIGIOUS INCLUSIONISM, which is the view all religions, irreligious philosophies, etc. are valid! You don't support that, you view Christianity as the only valid religion, so change the LINK!

Albums articles

I see you have been working on album articles and suggest you check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums for style and other useful tips. happy editing. Job e 6 21:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually for 98% or 13 out of 14 years of my life ive been living in the Washington D.C. area and am now currently in Chantilly, Virginia. Job e 6

02:42, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:AMW

You might want to rename this category since it might be easily confused with the m:Association of Mergist Wikipedians. I've left a message about this at Category talk:AMW. --Idont Havaname 14:45, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sign

Please sign your posts on talk pages using ~~~~. Thank you. Broken S 22:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Proposals and modesty

Aaron... I have to tell you, your proposal for the Association of Moral Wikipedians makes for very, hm, shall we say...

...very compelling reading.

However, not at all for the reasons you are hoping.

*shakes head* DS 23:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment

I do not find this comment on Kelly Martin's talk page to be appropriate at all. Wikipedia is not the forum for such judgments and I would advise you to keep them to yourself; policies on civility and no personal attacks apply. I would suggest you remove the comments and apologize; if you cannot refrain from insulting your fellow editors, you are hurting Wikipedia, and I will not warn you again. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I might not agree with all Karynn's opinions, but I would never dream of saying such a hurtful thing. You have been warned. Do it again and I'll block you so fast your eyes will spin. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That comment makes me exceptionally angry. You do not make personal attacks on Wikipedia, nor on any Wikimedia server. If you violate these policies again, Mindspillage and Ta bu shi da yu will not be the only ones clicking block. Rob Church ^{Talk | FAHD} 13:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

At first when I saw that comment, I was angry. But, when I saw it again I was sad, for I previously did not think a fellow Wikipedian would say something this hurtful. TDS ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Deuel.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Deuel.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{gfdl}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{fairuse}}.) See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by going to "Your contributions" from your user page and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. Rob Church ^{Talk | FAHD} 03:37, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sir...thank you,

I will get to tagging the image as soon as possible. But I don't believe it has any copyright, however, because it has been featured on a number of sites. I shall shoot for Fair Use. Best regards. I am much obliged for your assistance.

Эрон Кинней 01:26, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of where the image has been on the web, it will still have a copyright owner; only photographs older than about 70 years (plus life of creator; exact details vary according to all sorts of complexities like where the photograph was created, etc.) will be in the public domain. Even freely-licensed images have copyrights.

You may well get away with fair use on this one, provided that you

State where the photo came from (try to get it from the source, or as near to as possible)
Write an adequate fair use rationale - details on this are at the image copyright tags page linked to above
Only use the image in the one article

If you are going for fair use, you need to sort all this out quickly - we tend to clean out copyrighted stuff very fast. Rob Church ^Talk 13:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your're Pro-censorship

If you want to campaign for censorship so much, why, instead of establishing your own fringe association, don't you just join these censorship advocates, although they may be deleted: Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit?

Canadianism, not logged in!

Bill Bryson

Hi, it is best to put wikiquotes and commons links at the top of the links, see changes I made in Bill Bryson, Thanks Arniep 13:32, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Pink Floyd

By your edits it seems you like Pink Floyd, it's too bad there is no Wikiproject for the band. What is the criteria for Wikiprojects, or if you know of course.

Эрон Кинней 01:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't judge a book by its cover; don't a judge an editor by their edits. Many of the pages I've cleaned up or edited refer to subjects I've no interest in. I view it as one part of the Wikipedia experience - increasing one's knowledge.

In this case, however, you are correct. I consider Pink Floyd to be among the best proper rock groups in music history. In response to your question; you might like to refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject. There are no real criteria for WikiProjects, although such things need to be about a similar subject (there are exceptions to this).

I was considering starting a Pink Floyd portal, albeit a small one, if there isn't one already. Rob Church ^Talk 13:46, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Red links

Links should not be removed because the target articles are missing, if there is a chance that they could be written in the future. Red links are not a bad thing, they are good because they show editors where work is needed, and make sure future articles will not be orphans. If you think these links are distracting, you can change your user preferences to hide them. Fredrik | talk 00:37, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; this misconception isn't uncommon, after all. Feel free to remove links to articles that probably shouldn't exist -- an example that comes to mind is parents of average biography subjects (if the parents are not otherwise notable). And remove links that are used like this. Cheers, - Fredrik | talk 00:51, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Watch list

Sorry for taking so long to respond, my life has been fairly hectic in the last few days. I have removed you from my user watch list per your request. Broken S 20:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Template:Infobox President

I never actually expected the TFD to succeed for the President infobox, but I did want the subject to at least be discussed and to gauge community opinion on the matter. I do, however, want to see Template:Infobox Senator be deleted. --tomf688^{talk} 03:36, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimate fate of the universe

I've responded to your request on Talk:Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe. -Silence 02:03, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A Message to Pro-Life Wikipedians

The section "Foetal Pain" (Fetal Pain) has been deleted from the Abortion article. Could you help restore it? If you would like to see what was deleted, go to my talk page, scroll to "Fetal Pain," and click the provided link.--Thomas Aquinas 22:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-life Categories being listed for deletion!

I thought you might be intereted to know that the Category:Pro-life celebrities and Category:Pro-life politicians are being voted on for deletion since 11-24-2005. Here is the page they are being decided on: Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. Dwain 00:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Woops, sorry!

I was checking for spelling errors again and accidentally hit the "rollback" button on your edit. I rolled myself back to your edit. Apologies! :) FCYTravis 01:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good to have friends

As the heading says it's good to have friends on wikipedia, and I'm glad for your support. I don't necessarily have a Wikigenda but if anything comes up will be glad to let the community, and of course you, know. In turn I will gladly help you in anything. Thank you and God bless, Chooserr

Halibutt's RfA

I would like to express my thanks to all the people who took part in my (failed) RfA voting. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! I was also surprised by the amount of people who stated clearly that they do care, be it by voting in for or against my candidacy. That's what Wiki community is about and I'm really pleased to see that it works.
As my RfA voting failed with 71% support, I don't plan to reapply for adminship any more. However, I hope I might still be of some help to the community. Cheers! Halibu tt 05:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus

Check out the Jesus article and edit it to keep it focused on Jesus and a biographical account of Him. Watch the Jesus page to keep it focused on Him. Thank you. Scifiintel 22:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting in Ben Stein article

Hi- I made a couple of changes a couple of changes to your recent edits in the Ben Stein article:

I replaced
<em>the [[O'Reilly Factor]]</em>
with
''[[O'Reilly Factor|The O'Reilly Factor]]''

Use of html is discouraged unless it can't be done otherwise. Wiki formatting has '' that performs the same function
Also, I made "The O'Reilly Factor" appear as the link by using the pipe (|) character. You do this [[real name of link|text that you would like to appear in link]].

I hope this is helpful. If not, I apologize. --rogerd 23:13, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes hesitate to make suggestions like this when I am not sure if the user doesn't know how to do things like that or (in your case) it is just your personal preference. I understand that there is more that one "correct" way of doing things. --rogerd 14:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User categories, etc.

Heh, I wasted way too much time looking for all of those templates, time I could've spent editing articles instead of my vanity page. XD Thanks for the kind words. --Merovingian 03:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The default skin was what is now "Classic" (none of this sans-serif stuff). Also, this was what the Main Page looked like at the time of my first edit. --Merovingian 03:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's good! My first few months were very formative, and I didn't like the whole graphical change. --Merovingian 04:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all the links are there. And thanks for adding me, even though I'm rarely on. --Merovingian 04:20, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This type of censorship makes me sick

Vote to keep, show these hypocrites what's what, tolerance? ha, only when it's good for them--Diatrobica;l 23:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-life celebrities cat. up for deletion!

Hi, I see that you are listed as a Pro-Life Wikipedian, well the Pro-life celebrities category is up for deletion. Category:Pro-life celebrities The abortion zealots don't want anyone to think that any celebrity is actually pro-life. Dwain 23:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re:Category:Wikipedians by D&D Alignment

I noticed you are categorized as a Wikipedian by alignment. If you are in to userboxes, there are now infoboxes available using a standard template. See the alignment category page for details. xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 18:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Might you help again?

I want to start off by thanking you for your help with that picture on the birth control page, before moving on to the other reasons for this. So Thank You...I really don't know what you did to get rid of that image, but it really helped. I'm just sorry to report that that wasn't the end of the wikipedia pornography campaign. There are pictures on the Penis, and Vagina articles that while fit the subject matter may offend readers, and stop them from reading about the important information - some on heath - that is contained within them. I would appreciate your help if it is given...for none of these are acceptable encyclopedic content. Chooserr 05:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On of the images is here. Chooserr 05:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's also this one...oh also can you leave a message on the Penis talk page, and mabye get some wikifriends to help. If we could get rid of these graphic Images wikipedia would be a much safer place. Thank you,Chooserr 05:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Smith, Jr.

Thanks for your interest in the Joseph Smith, Jr. article. Please be aware that the LDS project group, Wikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, has discussed the term heretic in regards to Joseph Smith, Jr. In general, the concensus is that, since Smith belonged to no organized religious tradition but was raised in a generic Protestant belief system, that heresy is not applicable. As a restorationist, Smith's efforts were based both on Bibilical descriptions of Christianity as well as his claimed revelations and innovations. Please review the discussions (archived and current) on relevant pages, and consider chiming in on the project page. I look forward to working with you. WBardwin 03:53, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CFD

Hello, Category:Wikipedians interested in wikipedians has been deleted per Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 December 17#Category:Wikipedians interested in wikipedians. You may want to remove it from your userpage. Thanks. Izehar 17:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Moved Comment in Book of Daniel Discussion

Hello. Your comment in reply to 207.69.139.147 in the Book of Daniel discussion was stuck in the middle of someone else's comment. I moved your comment to the end of the queue so there would be no confusion. BehroozZ 07:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Lad, I hope that I am not being invasive, but I am curious as how you can be a monarchist and desire to become President of the United States(My assumption is that you desire to become a King or an Emperor once you are in office).--Anglius 20:35, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I must say that one of the downfalls of having my Wikipedia User details saved on this computer is that anyone going to Wikipedia is able to have edits attributed to my name. My left-leaning friend was at my house recently, and made that change while I was away from the computer. I have told him not to do such things, and I apologise for any harm that it may have caused. I hope that you do not find me as being some sort of petty vandal, as I do not partake in such pointless activity.

Once again I apologise for my friend's misdeeds.

--Rob McKay 07:53, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so also. --Rob McKay 06:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed upon. Эйрон Кинни 02:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 06:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]